Regis University

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
840402707
IRS 990 coverage
2009–2024
Official website data refreshed
Aug 2026
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
Location
Denver, CO, USA
Phone
303.458.4900
Rating
79
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate
Sector
Elementary, Secondary Education, K - 12
Affiliation
Christianity

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$182,539,610
Expenses
$181,480,324
Assets
$220,631,739
Liabilities
$83,679,986

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

37 people listed

Executive titles in this filing

  • SALVADOR D ACEVES (PRESIDENT)
  • SENTHIL KUMAR (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT)
  • KELLY PURDY (VICE PRESIDENT, ADVANCEMENT)
  • MADHU RAO (VICE PRESIDENT, ADVANCEMENT)
  • BARBARA WILCOTS (VICE PRESIDENT OF STUDENT AFFAIRS)

Highest reported compensation

  • SALVADOR D ACEVES (PRESIDENT): $484,147 total reported compensation
  • SENTHIL KUMAR (SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT): $337,614 total reported compensation
  • JAKE BUCHER (PROVOST, ACADEMIC AFFAIRS): $311,400 total reported compensation

Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

As a Jesuit Catholic university, Regis seeks to build a more just and humane world through transformative education at the frontiers of faith, reason and culture.

What it reported doing in 2024

Regis college provides value-centered traditional undergraduate education to students and encourages them to make a positive impact in a changing society. Regis college's liberal arts education provides the opportunity for students to explore the question how ought we to live? While cultivating a high quality academic education. Abundant opportunities for service learning, academic internships and cross cultural study abroad experiences motivate students to take their education beyond the classroom. Regis students enjoy hundreds of activities beyond academics, including division ii ncaa athletics, the outdoor adventure program, intramural sports, the campus radio station, student government and much more.

Operating model

Revenue model
Earned-program. 83% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
Distribution model
Hybrid. The nonprofit split its reported program spending across 63% for direct work, and 37% for grants.
  • Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing reports few safeguards for money sent abroad and fundraising costs are high for each dollar raised.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 82
  • Transparency & Controls: 74
  • Accountability: 84
  • Sustainability: 43
  • Growth: 100

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 85.9%; rating input score 86
  • Program expense ratio: 85.5%; rating input score 85
  • Fundraising efficiency: $14.27 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 50; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 68th percentile among comparable filings
  • Pay-setting controls: 3 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 50
    • Compensation committee: Pass
    • Independent consultant: Missing
    • Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
    • Written employment contract: Missing
    • Compensation survey or study: Pass
    • Board or committee approval: Pass
  • Foreign activity oversight: Scored; rating input score 0
  • Grant itemization coverage: 100%; rating input score 100; 77th percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
  • Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100

Accountability

  • Independent voting board: 81.5%; rating input score 81; 29th percentile among comparable filings
  • Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
    • Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
    • Whistleblower policy: Pass
    • Document-retention policy: Pass
    • CEO compensation review process: Pass
    • Other executive compensation review process: Pass
    • Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
    • Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
    • Audit committee oversight: Pass
    • Independent financial-statement audit: Pass

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 0.6%; rating input score 35; 35th percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.22; rating input score 46; 46th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.38; rating input score 47; 47th percentile among comparable filings
  • Officer compensation ratio: 1.5%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: 0.9% per year; rating input score 100; 10th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 0.6% per year; rating input score 100; 7th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 2.5% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • What they do: 5 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
  • Where the money goes: 85.9% of revenue deployed · 85.5% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: 22 of 27 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
  • Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments · $155.1M in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $484K · 37 people listed · 3 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
  • Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $11.6M reported
  • Consistency: 40 of 40 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 14 filed schedules · includes major donors, foreign activity, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
  • Filing history: 16 filing years from 2009 to 2024
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 23 filed money-flow records
  • Related organizations: 4 filed related-organization links
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

Grant-readiness screening is separate from the live rating, not a measure of program quality. Review the source records before making a grant decision.

  • High — Transparency & Controls: Foreign activity oversight scored 0/100.
  • Review — Financial Efficiency: Fundraising efficiency scored 50/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 35/100.
  • Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Form 990 shared with the board not reported.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 46/100.
  • Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 47/100.
  • High — Grant Readiness: Federal audit findings: this organization reported findings in its latest federal Single Audit.